By: Gen. Jim — 4/17/24
When it comes to the discussion or debate about women in the ministry, 1 Timothy 2:14 is brought up: “And Adam was not deceived, but the WOMAN being DECEIVED, fell into TRANSGRESSION.” – NKJV. Verse 15 says “…she will be saved in childbearing if she continue in faith, love, & holiness, with self-control.”
My, my, those awful women will be taught a thing or two for doing what Eve did in the Garden! Do you smell a rat? “But Gen. Jim, Paul wrote that!” Yep, sure did! But what did he mean? Only women who marry and have children can actually be saved? What about other women who are not married? How are they saved?
According to most church men (the misogynists), who view Eve as primarily responsible for the original SIN; hence women are disqualified for teaching & preaching. But let’s take a journey in the Bible, examining several texts that contrast 1 Tim. 2:14,15.
Q. Did the Old Testament (O.T.) disqualify women from leadership roles? While the Bible does have evil/ruthless women in leadership, there were more responsible/godly women on record. I suggest you misogynists do a better Bible study before you condemn ALL females to the “home alone.” Proverbs/wisdom itself extensively portrayed women giving instruction to any & all (men & women) willing to learn (see Prov. 1:20-33; 8:1-9:6).
My favorite chapter is Proverbs 31, the valiant & godly woman who “opens her mouth with wisdom, & the TEACHING of kindness is on her tongue (v.26).” Don’t even try and tell me that it is wisdom portrayed as female, not actually a woman. (I suggest that you “women haters” read 1 Sam. 25:3-35; 2 Sam. 14:2-23; 20:16-22; Proverbs for sure; Judges 2:16; Neh. 9:27; Jud. 4:4,5,9,21,22; 2 Sam. 20:22; Deut. 20:10-12; 1 Sam. 25:33-35; 2 Sam. 14:1-24; Esther 4:14; 9:11,12,29-32 et al.). These are but a few O.T. women that were godly: the New Testament (N.T.) women are many also.
Back to 1 Tim. 2:14
Ok., we see that the woman was deceived & “fell into transgression.” What about her husband, Adam? All Paul says is that “…a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.” -vss.11,12. Why? Paul tells us in vs.13: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve.” (Please see my other articles on this). Time to get into deep waters now: please read Romans 5:12-19 (in several versions).
What do you find? According one Bible theologian, Paul ascribes the GUILT to Adam (man/male) 9 different times! Here in Romans 5:12-19 we read the “likeness of Adam’s transgression” (vs.14). Oh, my!
“Transgression”/ “parabasis” (Greek), meaning “violation, i.e. breaking a command.” This Gk. word is used in both cases, 1 Tim. 2:14 & Rom. 5:14. One Bible theologian makes a good point in saying perhaps it would be more just to postulate that the apostle, when speaking of “Adam,” has in mind both male/female (see Gen. 5:1,2 where “Adam” is a generic name for “humankind,” as in Gen. 1:27,28; see my other articles on the name “Adam” = male & female & “Adam” = man/male).
The Heb. Bible & (Gk. trans., the Septuagint), states that Adam was WITH Eve when she committed the transgression (Gen. 3:6). (note: many trans. lack this statement, the Heb. lit. reads, “She gave to her husband, who was with her.” This account surely infers that Adam/Eve were equally responsible).
Was Paul putting forth a distorted/perverted view of God’s redemptive grace in 1 Tim. 2:14?
Whatever you believe, 1 Cor. 15:21-22 tells us, “For by man came death, by man also the resurrection from the dead. For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ will all be made alive.”
Many good theologians/Bible experts tell us that (in ref. to Rom. 5:12-19) the consequences of Christ’s obedience extend as far as the consequences of Adam’s (male & female) disobedience. Since Paul used the Gk. word “parabasis” in Rom. 5:14, meaning “Adam’s transgression,” he no doubt included both man & woman, not just one or the other. So, why didn’t he include Adam (the husband) in the “transgression” in 1 Tim. 2:14? He states that “Adam was not deceived.” That’s correct! Adam rebelled! It was he (not his wife) that received the command not to eat of the particular tree/fruit. (read Gen. 2:15-17). Why did Paul fail to mention that God gave Adam (man) a command?
Back to 1 Tim. 2:12-14
According to Dr. T.R. Edgar, in ref. to 1 Tim. 2:9-15, he wrote: “The verses (v.12-14) is not complicated, the argument of the passage seems clear, & the normal lexical meaning of the terms seem to fit well” (see Contextualized Interpretations of 1 Tim. 2:12: An Analysis,” 1988).
This professor linked Eve’s judgment at the fall (Gen. 3). In ref. to 1 Tim. 2:14 (our target text) this prof. writes: “As a result of her (women) actions God tells her that she will bear children in pain, that her desire will be to her husband, & that he will RULE (have authority) over her (Gen. 3:16). The punishments, subjection & childbearing, are the two issues in 1 Tim. 2:11-15. The woman’s conduct in the fall is, according to Genesis, a primary reason for her universal, timeless subordinate relationship.” (ibid). Note: this professor’s reasoning is like unto Tertullian (see what I quoted from his writings, Tertullian De cultu feminarum 1.1.1-2).
May I remind you of…
If we’re to believe that the woman/women are cursed forever, let me remind you of what Ex. 20:5,6; Deut. 5:9,10; 7:9 says about the consequence of sin. And may I remind you that Christ broke the curse (when anyone repents & invites Him into their lives). Paul knew all this, so why did he write 1 Tim. 2:12-14? To construe these texts as a perpetual condemnation of women (not men!) flies in the face of what Christ did at salvation. According to 1 Jn. 1:9, the Blood of Jesus cleanses us of ALL sin! And, may I remind you, both O.T. & N.T. declare each person must answer for his/her own sin (see Eccl. 12:14; Rom. 14:10 & 2 Cor. 5:10). You may also want to look up Ezek. 18:17-22.
If we’re going to use Eve’s transgression as an excuse to keep women under male subjection FOREVER!, then what about Adam’s transgression? And what if a female can’t bear children – is she rejected from salvation? Is not the N.T. a testament of God’s love, mercy, forgivness? May I quote Romans 8:1? “There is therefore now NO CONDEMNATION to those who are in Christ Jesus…” Isn’t the Gospel the “Good News?” Please take note of Paul’s (Saul’s) testimony – he was a murderer & blasphemer (1 Tim. 1:12,13 etc.)
Why?
Why did God give gifts to the church (see 1 Cor. 12:1-11). Prophecy (v.10) is one gift that operates openly in the church – for women as well as for men, yet, isn’t prophecy a word from the Spirit/Lord to the congregation? It includes teaching! “Oh no!” you say. “Oh yes” the Bible says. Prophecy is for both men & women.
Condemnation vs Refutation
Ok, here is what we’re looking at: Is Paul condemning or refuting the teaching of women in the church? (see my previous articles). There are some men/women that see that these vss. (1 Tim. 2:12-14) are not intended as the rationale for prohibiting a ministry for the females, but rather they constitute a refutation of a wide-spread HERESY (Gnostic Mythology of Eve, plus Rabbinical teachings who were against women). (One may want to read Irenaeus’ “Against Heresies,” where he refutes their Gnostic Religion).
Did Adam Know?
The Bible declares “Adam was not deceived,” (1 Tim. 2:14). The woman confessed, “The serpent deceived me” (Gen. 3:13). Did Adam know that taking the fruit from the hands of his wife was in disobedience to God’s command to him? He knew he was TRANSGRESSING! So, why was Eve punished more? God, according to what Paul wrote (from God or from Gnosticism) has not only rendered her UNFIT for rule/ministry, but he has subjected her, expressly, to the government of man.
We ask, what of those women who have died in child-bearing (v.15)? Does this mean they were not saved? Could Paul mean that salvation of the human race, through child-bearing, was intimated in the sentence passed on the serpent, (Gen. 3:15)?: “I will put enmity between thee & the woman, & between thy seed & her seed. It shall bruise thy head.” Christ was the seed of the woman – and a woman, by bringing Him forth, has been the occasion of our salvation!
According to the traditional teaching, 1 Tim. 2:11 is epigrammatic in form. In church women are “learners,” not “teachers” (see 1 Cor. 14:34,35). As already stated, 1 Cor. 11:2-16, on the contrary, does not question woman’s right to pray/prophecy in church, but only insists that she be veiled (a cultural thing in that day, but not today). As expected, this is questioned (as I have). If 1 Cor. 14:34,35 is a marginal gloss (as some believe), & if 1 Cor. 11:2-16 conveys the TRUE Pauline point of view, then the present passage would represent a later & more conservative position with regard to women in church than that of Paul or than is represented in the book of Acts (where both men & women were filled with the Holy Ghost, fulfilling Joel’s prophecy (2:28) where women & men could prophecy).
And, lest we forget, Mary Magdalene was commissioned by the resurrected Jesus to “go to My brethren & say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father & your Father, & to My God & your God.” (Jn. 20:17). Was this not the “Good News?” So, who was first to tell it? Yep! Mary Magdalene! But there were other WOMEN at the tomb, e.g. “…Joanna, Mary the mother of James, & the other women with them, who told these things to the apostles” (Lk. 24:9). Hey misogynists, what happened to the “women must remain silent?”
Other N.T. Women
What are we going to do with what Philippians 4:3 says?: “And I urge you also, true companion, help these WOMEN who labored with me in the gospel…” “In the gospel?” There is also a debate over church teaching & gospel preaching. The more strict men tell us that women are not to do either – preach to the unsaved/or the saved. What did Paul have in mind (Phil. 4:3)? Who were these women? It was a known fact that both in Grecian & Asiatic countries women were kept secluded, so it was not likely Paul had a chance to converse with them, so it was necessary to have some Christian women with him… to preach to the women. Some believe the women with Paul were Euodias & Syntyche (note: some believe the name Syntyche was male, & Euodias was his wife. But Phil. 4:3 says “women.” Regardless of man/wife or several women, Paul used women in the Gospel work. Others believe Euodias & Syntyche (Phil. 4:2) were pious deaconesses at Philippi. (note: In the RSV, Moffatt, et al. say Euodia is a woman’s name, therefore, Euodia & Syntyche were 2 women. -please take note of these texts: Acts 16:13,14, Lydia was obviously a leading woman figure in Philippi; Acts 17:4,12) why were the women at Corinth regulated to a lower plain/status?
Romans 16:1-5
What do we make of “Phoebe our sister, which is a servant of the Church which is at Cenchrea…”, -v.1. Here we find Paul writing to the church at Rome. “Servant” (Gk., “diakonos” = “specially a Christian TEACHER & PASTOR can also mean deaconess/minister.”) (It was a fact that women performed tasks that men could not perform, see Broughton’s Dict., article on deaconess etc.).
“Greet Priscilla & Aquila, my helpers in Christ Jesus…” v.3. Here we find a man & wife helping in the Gospel. (note: instead of Priscilla, the principal Manuscripts (MSS) & versions have Prisca). These two are mentioned in 1 Cor. 16:19/Acts 18:2,3,26; vs.26 tells us that both man & woman explained to Apollos (v.24) “the way of God more accurately” What? A woman teaching another man. Not only was Apollos mighty in Scripture, he also was “fervent in spirit: (vs.25), but needed more, hence Aquila (man) & Priscilla (woman).
Acts 21:9
Here we find 4 virgins (daughters of Philip) that could prophesy, which also means to teach/preach! I could go on and list many other texts where women are mentioned. Paul was obviously refuting older Jewish traditions/practices (see my article on this -parts of the Babylonian/Jerusalem Talmud quoted).
As I have shown (in other articles) that the word “teach” (Gk., verb, “διδάσκω,”) only here in 1 Tim. 2:12, needs to be examined by those misogynists. If we’re to take “I suffer not a woman to teach,” taken literally as authoritative commands, they would EXCLUDE WOMEN completely from ALL leadership in the Church. Thank God this does not square with many other texts found – women such as Lydia, Dorcas, Priscilla, Tryphena, & Tryphosa, Persis, Julia, Euodia, Syntyche, et al. The prohibition, if researched, was influenced by the Jewish/pagan customs of the day, which Paul refuted, not agreed with. If a woman is appointed/anointed of the Holy Ghost, what right does the male sex to say they must remain silent… forever?
For the record, I do not believe any and all women should preach/teach/rule (men likewise); I do believe it is wrong to forbid a woman from teaching/preaching if God calls her.
Eyes Wide Open
In finishing this article I leave you with 1 Tim. 2:14: “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” (NKJV). The Amp. Bible says Eve was “deceived & deluded.” We get it! Adam was not deceived by the serpent BUT SINNED with his eyes wide open! Eve was blinded by the serpent’s wiles. So, may we ask ourselves, which of the two was the greater sinner? Is this how men see it? Since it was now obvious that the female was not worthy of the status of equality, it was necessary that she should forever be subjected to her husband & deprived of the right to teach men. Is it true that all women are easily deceived? If so, then all men sin with their eyes wide open!
But was Paul telling Timothy that all females will never be allowed to teach or certain women? How long will anti-women churches keep the stigma of Eve’s transgression alive, while promoting the male gender? One researcher has written: “The earliest writer to lay at Eve’s door the blame for the advent of sin & death into the world is Ben Sirach in the second century B.C.E. (Ecclus. 25:24). By the time the N.T. the pseude pigraphic versions of the Eve story bitterly denounce her for having been deceived by a celestial seducer. She must everlastingly bear the burden of guilt. In the first-century work known as Life of Adam & Eve, she cries, ‘Alas, alas, when I come to the day of resurrection, all who have sinned will curse me, saying that Eve did not keep the command of God.’” [Life of Adam & Eve 3.1, 18.1. In the Apocrypha & Pseudepigraha of the O.T., ed. R.H. Charles (Oxford: Clarendon, 1913), 2:143.]
It was Eve that brought salvation to the world – the promise of Gen. 3:15, that serpent should bruise the woman’s child, but that the child would bruise the serpent’s head. By & through the DEFEAT of Satan on the cross, her sin & guilt were wiped away. Eve was indeed REDEEMED through her Offspring who brough salvation/forgiveness into the world! (see Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus Christ –Matthew chapter one).
Again, let it be said that 1 Cor. 14:34,35 & 1 Tim. 2:13,14 were not intended as the rationale for prohibiting a gospel ministry for women, BUT they constitute a refutation of heresy, Talmudic/Gnostic et al. 1 Cor. 14:34,35 Paul was answering a letter sent to him, which was a common practice to read what the letter contained: “Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says…” what “law?” If we go back to chapter 7, Paul begins with, “Now concerning the things of which you wrote me: ‘It is good for a man not to teach a woman.’” Vs.1 He quotes what someone wrote “It is good for a man not to teach a woman.” He answers, “Nevertheless…” You can follow this statement/answer up until chapter 14.
Take note: 7:1, marriage; 8:1, food & idols; 12:1, spiritual gifts; 16:1, contribution for the saints; 16:12, possibly about Apollos. It may be possible that other topics were not introduced with, “now concerning,” e.g. 14:34,35 (see my articles on this). One Bible version reads: “with regard to your letter & its suggestion that it would be a fine thing for a man not to have anything to do with a woman.” Paul did not write this, neither did he write 1 Cor. 14:34 & 35: “Let your women keep silent in the congregation…” In the Greek world the place of women was low – Sophocles wrote: “Silence confers grace upon a woman.”